Log in/Register

Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.

Log in

Register

Emailrequired

PasswordrequiredRemember me?

Please enter your email address and click on the reset-password button. You'll receive an email shortly with a link to create a new password. If you have trouble finding this email, please check your spam folder.

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To access our archive, please log in or register now and read two articles from our archive every month for free. For unlimited access to our archive, as well as to the unrivaled analysis of PS On Point, subscribe now.

We all came out of Africa and changing local conditions and forces forge individual make-up and personalities. Risks and opportunities encouraged alliances, teams and tribes which developed into the structures of modern society.
Very fundamental to mankind is the desire to find excuses and transfer blame to others for our weaknesses and bad luck. This underlies the very basic need to believe in the existence of deities and power seekers over the centuries have learned to shape and harness this for their own ends. Deity worship became formalized into religious structures and competition between them grew.
As most people know, in competing situations the leadership of teams or tribes often use the designation of an enemy, with appropriate propaganda, in order to rally the group members.
Power politics and prejudice continue to trump our common humanity.

I doubt the wisdom of calling political conflicts a reflection of ideological/religious conflicts rather than the other way around.
Another, more fruitful perspective is that ideological/religious conflicts reflect political/economic tensions: hierarchical political systems that primarily benefit elites without sufficient (democratic or other) checks & balances and can thus only be challenged by appeal to religious/ideological identities, strenghtening these in the process.

Both perspectives are 'true' to the extent that our 'performative' use of language makes them true: social reality is a language construct.
If we link our conflicts to age-old religious shisms, we shackle ourselves to an unchangeable past.
If we recognise that such age-old religious shisms do not necessarily have a stronger hold on us than the rivalry between the supporters of soccer clubs of two major cities in a country (which can be bad enough and cause a lot of violence), we can find practical solutions here and now.

The religious element of political conflicts IS a major cause or our inability to handle them constructively, because religion roots in identity.
Identities are far more changeable than the histories to which they are linked, however.
It is usually our own identification that stands in the way of taking a step back and enabling us to see that and to find solutions.

It is very easy to kick the rump of the religious fanatic anywhere. 1. Ask them to define religion. 2. Admire them: OMG you are that bright?! Why do you not write a paper on that? 3. Tell them the obvious: Why don't you shut up & go and masturbate in your own private space & time? Unless too thick-skinned & too dense-headed (call the cops or keep your handgun ready & next to you), works unfailingly in making them religious by their own definitions and leave you in peace.

Shahid Javed Burki, as a former minister of Pakistan, I would have expected a more profound commentary on the Sunni-Shia schism. The "Islam versus Islam" conflict is so ancient and the topic so overworn that anybody, who feels compelled to write something about it, needs to seek a new perspective on the issue.
The author's focus on "the conflicts between Islam’s two sects, Sunni and Shia," is nothing new. His account is purely descriptive, and the differences between the two "sects" of Islam, are widely mentioned and known. As he speaks of the conflict "between fundamentalists and reformists," he should have elaborated more on it, offering the readers an analytical essay, which can be interesting.
Unlike the sectarian divide between the Sunnis and Shiites, who share many fundamental beliefs and practices, while differing in doctrine, ritual, law, theology and religious organisation, Sunnis and Shiites often find themselves embroiled in internal strife, pitting one camp against the other, tearing communities apart. As an example is the Sunni rivalry between Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood and the dominant, austere Saudi Wahhabi sect, with its strict interpretation of Islam. More often it is about the tussle between "fundamentalists and reformists."
The reason why Egypt's president Mohammed Morsi was only in power for a year, is that the military under Abdel Fattah al-Sisi had him removed at the behest of Saudi Arabia. Morsi's party, the Muslim Brotherhood is now banned from formally participating in parliamentary elections. When Morsi was elected in 2012, the Brotherhood's supporters hoped it would usher in a moderate Islamist state in the mould of Turkey. Their famous slogan "Islam is the solution," which, despite its "moderate Islamic reference," concerned critics, who thought they might want to turn Egypt into a more extremist religious state.
Sunnis, who are adherents of Wahhabism, "favor theocratic authoritarian rule, whereas more moderate Sufi Sunnis would prefer liberal and inclusive political systems." Sufism spawned the Muslim Brotherhood, which was founded by Hassan al-Banna in 1928, making it Egypt's oldest and largest Islamist organisation. Since the Saudis became immensely rich, thanks to oil revenues, conservative Sunnis finance Wahhabi "madrassas" - religious schools - across South Asia to the Afghan-Pakistani border, enabling impoverished boys and young men to become radicalised, learning how to make IEDs and to be suicide bombers.
The author says the Shia-led Iran "has long stuck to theocratic rule, but now seems to be looking toward reform," which aims at improving lives for ordinary Iranians and boosting the country's economy. But it will not change the country's political system. It is true that the Sunni-Shia sectarian divide could only be bridged, if "reformists can gain sufficient influence in both camps. If not, the conflict will continue to rage, accelerating the breakdown of regional order we now see."

I wish the author explained to the readers what Saudi did to topple the government of Iran. Saudi never tried to intervene with the huge interior problems of Iran, in fact it was extremely patient for decades with the chronically repeated aggression and sabotages planned by Iran and carried out by its agents in the region. One of those agents was a renowned terrorist, whom you, shamefully, described as a popular Shia cleric, and who was well known for inciting Saudi shia's against their government.
when the Prophet Muhammad died, in the same day, Muslims immediately elected his successor; { and whose affair is [determined by] consultation among themselves, and from what We have provided them, they spend. And those who, when tyranny strikes them, they defend themselves}_The Holy Quran.
What Distinguishes Islam from other religions is being unchanged; the creator {Allah} must be one, and worshiped alone with no partners whatever. Saudi will, peacefully, continue carrying and teaching this peaceful message to those who like to restore their ties with their creator.

Sorry for being late to read your reply.
You are right Steve, my country is not peaceful and tolerant with murderers, who killed a human being must be beheaded, so criminals think a thousand times before committing there crimes . We do know that this does not please criminals all over the world, but we just do not care.
Regarding Syrian refugees, what I see around me, not what biased international media say, are too many Syrian refugees living among us, just like us, not as refugees. Classes in schools are above 45 students each, because of Syrian children. Indeed, I believe their number exceeds two millions.
There are principles that must not be changed, even by corrupted clerics and politicians. Driving 100 -150 million red Indians to near extinction in the Americas, as an example, will always be a horrific crime. Giving yourself the right to attack other countries under the allegation of fighting "terrorism", but in fact, to loot their natural resources, and killing millions of innocent human beings like in Afghanistan, Iraq etc. will always be wrong. That what I meant by saying Islam has not changed, its principles that protect human beings.
If we had tried to impose Islam on others, there would not have been a place for non-Muslims in the Islamic world, compare this to christian Europe.

@Talal
I do not understand how you can describe KSA as peaceful and by implication tolerant. Peaceful tolerant societies do not routinely and publically behead hundreds of people and refuse refugees of their own faith from war zones
'What Distinguishes Islam from other religions is being unchanged'. Yes indeed, why do you think living in the 7th century is the answer to todays world problems. By all means go your own way but stop imposing it on others

It is not Islam versus Islam, but more the minority extreme fundamentalists of two sects versus each other. The existing conflict has been exacerbated by the major powers with ulterior motives in the past few decades. It will get much worse with loss of more innocent lives. And no end in sight.

"Conflicts like these reflect a number of factors, the most prominent of which are the conflicts between Islam’s two sects, Sunni and Shia, and between fundamentalists and reformists".
if you look at this paragraph above from the article you will see that author is telling the world indirectly that Sunni Islam are fundamentalist and Shia are reformists. who started the violence in Yemen are shia Houthi and who is bombing the innocent women and children are Allawi shia backed by other shia in the region. Sunni Islam are the victims according to facts on the ground. please stop saying Islam v Islam. Islam is principle from Allaah so change the heading

I would argue that Islam was born of warfare and will forever be embroiled in warfare. Any idea which claims superiority over all other ideas at all costs will sooner or later meet a fight to the death. Not that Islam has a monopoly on this problem - Donald Trump, for instance has Muslim style thinking - it simply replaces the word Allah with the word America.

The Quran itself never mentioned that they are two types of Islam, Sunni or Shia. There is only one Islam in the Quran, but somehow human made it complicated by adding political motives (dunya factos).